See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279983251

Evaporation from reservoir and reduction

methods: An overview and assessment study

Conference Paper · May 2009

CITATIONS READS

0 669

2 authors, including:

Mostafa Ali Benzaghta

Sirte University
13 PUBLICATIONS 10 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Assessment of Evapotranspiration Models in Semi-arid Environment View project

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Mostafa Ali Benzaghta
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 02 October 2016
International Engineering Convention.
Domascus, Syria and Medinah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, May 11-18, 2009

Evaporation from reservoir and reduction methods: An overview and

assessment study

Mostafa A. Benzaghta1,2 and Thamer A. Mohamad1

1
Department of Civil Engineering
Faculty of Eengineering-University Putra Malaysia
2
Sirte Universiry, Libya
E-mail: benzaghta69@yahoo.com

Abstract:Global warming and the increasing concentration of greenhouse gases in the

atmosphere will affect temperature and rainfall. This change has direct effect on
reservoirs storage and availability of water resources. For example, measuremnts done
in Australia showed that 95% of the rainfall is evaporated agin which effect the
available water storage. Many methods were proposed to reduce evaporation from open
resrvoirs. These methods can be categorised as physical and chemical methods. Resrach
was done evalute the efffectivness of the these methods in evaporation reduction from
reservoirs. Published reserch revealed that the physical methods can reduce
evaporation effevitely without environmental consquences but chemical methods effects
water quality and reduce evaportaion by 20 to 40% only.

Introduction

The future effects of climate change on water resources in the world will depend
on trends in both climatic and non-climatic factors. Evaluating these impacts is
challenging because water availability, quality and stream flow are sensitive to changes
in temperature and precipitation. Other important factors include increased demand for
water caused by population growth, changes in the economy, development of new
technologies, changes in watershed characteristics and water management decisions
(Arnell 1999).

Changes in temperature and precipitation patterns can have impacts on water

availability. Temperature is predicted to rise in most areas, but it is generally expected to
increase more in inland areas and at higher latitudes. Higher temperatures will increase
loss of water through evaporation (Beare and Heaney 2002).

Warming of climate usually associated with an increase in energy at the surface.

But the increase is not like an exponential function of temperature. It is more like linear
than exponential (Arnell and Reynardb 1996). Thus, evaporation will increase as climate
warms, but the increase is not as fast as that of water vapor content in the atmosphere.
The mean residence time of water vapor in the atmosphere will decrease. In terms of
mass per unit time, water cycle will "accelerate", but in terms of rate of recycling
(reciprocal of mean residence time), it will "decelerate" (Jozef 2008).

1
International Engineering Convention.
Domascus, Syria and Medinah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, May 11-18, 2009

Now a day, overall development and scientific advancement the demand for water
has increased considerably as aresult of the increase in population and industrial activity.
But the available resources of water, particularly in the aird and semiard regions are
limited. Any development of water resources should therefore ensure efficient control,
conservation, and use of available water (Christiansen and Worlton 1998). This goal
would mean the restriction of all avoidable losses. Whereas seepage loss in watercourses
and fields returns to streams and aquifers for reuse, evaporation loss signifies water that
is finally lost from the available supply. Hence there is need for more emphasis on
minimizing, if not preventing, the vast losses due to evaporation (Shaw 1988).

Defination of Evaporation

Evaporation refers to water losses from the surface of a water body to the
atmosphere. Evaporation occurs when the number of moving molecules that break from
the water surface and escape into the air as vapour is larger than the number that re-enters
the water surface from the air and become entrapped in the liquid (Brutsaert 1982).
Evaporation increases with high wind speed, high temperatures and low humidity. A
sizable quantity of water is lost every year by evaporation from storage reservoirs and
evaporation of water from large water bodies influences the hydrological cycle. Among
the hydrological cycle, evaporation is perhaps the most difficult to estimate due to
complex interactions among the components of land-plant-atmosphere system (Singh and
Xu 1997).

Igor (1999) presents the trend of evaporation from reservoirs for a period from
1990 to 2010 (Figure 1). Also, evaporation reduces the yield from catchment areas to
reservoirs by a considerable amount. The amount lost depends upon meteorological
factors such as temperature of the air and water, wind velocity and atmospheric humidity.
Monitoring of evaporation from impounding reservoirs will give an idea about the
evaporation rate. Mathematically, the evaporation can be estimated using five methods
and these methods are water budget, energy budget, mass transfer, combined mass
transfer and energy budget and empirical formulae (Brutsaert 1982). The most common
methods used for estimating evaporation form water surfaces by direct measurements are
US class A pan, ISI standard pan, Colorado sunken pan and Russian GGI pan
(Christiansen 1968). Monthly evaporation is most useful as they can be applied to the
drier months of the year when reservoir drawdown by use of water may be expressed to
be greatest (Yu and knapp1985).

2
International Engineering Convention.
Domascus, Syria and Medinah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, May 11-18, 2009

Industrial and Domestic Consumption Compared

with Evaporation from Reservoirs

Evaporation Rate 300

250
Industrial and
(km3/year
200 municipal
consumption
150 Evaporation from
100 reservoirs

50
0
1900
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
1995
2000
2010
Time (Year)

Figure 1: Comparison between evaporation form reservoir and

industrial and domestic water consumption (Igor, 1999)

Evaporation rates are to a great extent dependent upon the characteristics of the
water body. Evaporation from small shallow ponds is usually considered to be quite
different than that of large lakes mainly due to differences in the rates of heating and
cooling of the water bodies because of size and depth differences.
Additionally, in semi-arid regions, hot dry air moving from a land surface over a water
body will result in higher evaporation rates for smaller water bodies (Larry et al. 2007).

Evaporation Estimates

Many methods exist for either measuring or estimating evaporative losses from
free water surfaces. Evaporation pans provide one of the simplest, inexpensive, and most
widely used methods of estimating evaporative losses (Jones 1992). Long-term pan
records are available, providing a potential source of data for developing probabilities of
net evaporation (Özgür 2006). The use of pan data involves the application of a
coefficient to measured pan readings to estimate evaporation from a larger water body
(Cooley 1983). Among the most useful methods for estimating evaporation from free
water surfaces are the methods which use climatological data. Many of these equations
exist, most being based directly upon the equation derived by Penman (1948) which was
originally intended for open water surfaces, but is now commonly applied to estimates of
vegetative water use.

Evaporation direct measurement techniques are not recommended for routine

hydrologic engineering applications because they imply time consuming procedure
requiring expensive equipment in order to obtain precise and carefully designed

3
International Engineering Convention.
Domascus, Syria and Medinah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, May 11-18, 2009

experiments (Donald et al. 2007). On the other hand, evaporation estimation methods
based on climatic data are very common in the case of hydrologic and irrigation
applications. Such methods vary from simple empirical formulations to complex methods
such as the physically based combination method of Penman (1948). Penman (1948)
published the radiation-aerodynamic combination equation to predict evaporation from
open water, bare soil, and grass. The original Penman (1948) equation is widely used as
the standard method in hydrologic engineering applications to estimate potential
evaporation from open water under varying locations and climatic conditions
(Shuttleworth 1993; Dingman 1994).

Pan evaporation is considered an indication of atmospheric evaporative power.

Evaporation from a free surface is related to pan evaporation by a coefficient applied to
the pan readings. Most evaporation pans in the U. S. are Class A pans made of unpainted
galvanized iron or stainless steel 4 feet in diameter and 10 inches deep. The pans are
supported on low wooden frames and are filled with 8 inches of water (Jones 1992). A
large network of Class A evaporation pans have been set up in the United States. Data
from regular reporting pan stations are published in the Climatological Summaries of the
National Weather Service (NWS). The number of reporting NWS stations in Wyoming
varies with time, but averages near 6. Some additional pan data are available from other
agencies such as the U. S. Bureau of Reclamation.

Significance of evaporation Losses

With increasing environmental concern and concentration upon irrigation water

use efficiency, there is now considerable pressure upon us all to optimize as far as
possible the use of our most precious resource - water. For example, the rate of
evaporation is in excess of 2m per year over most of Australia’s landmass and mean
rainfall in Australia is less than 500mm per year and falling (Erick 2007). On such a hot
dry continent, it has been estimated that up to 95% of the rain which falls in Australia is
re-evaporated and does not contribute to runoff. Water when harvested is commonly
stored in small storages and dams, but it is estimated that up to half of this may be lost
due to evaporation (Craig et al. 2005).

Evaporation losses from water storages can potentially be large, particularly in

impounding storages where evaporation rates are high. NRM’s project brief for
evaporation study, estimated that farm water storages in Queensland (Australia) alone
equate to a total capacity of 2,500,000ML. Most of these storages are shallow (water
depth 4 to 5 meters) and the annual evaporation loss could be as high as 40%. This
equates to an annual evaporation loss of 1,000,000ML which is sufficient to irrigate
about 125,000 hectares and generate an annual gross value of approximately $375million.
While the above assumptions are broad they indicate the potential savings that can be
made through evaporation reduction (Watts 2005). These savings can use for additional
crop production or water transfer to other user groups such as to meet environmental
targets.

4
International Engineering Convention.
Domascus, Syria and Medinah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, May 11-18, 2009

Evaporation Reduction Techniques Method

Efforts oriented to limit evaporation from water reservoirs are not new, as they
probably started in the 1960s using low volatile oils and monolayermolecular films
(Frenkiel 1965) as a protection layer of the water surface against evaporation. Since then,
concerns about water resources have promoted the use of techniques allowing a better
control of the evaporation losses (Condie and Webster 1997; Hipsey and Sivapalan,
2003; Montaseri and Adeloye 2004). Many urban water storages are located in areas of
high evaporation. The use of evaporation reduction techniques has the potential to
provide greater security of supply. The following methods of evaporation reduction are
not a complete listing of all methods (Brown1988):

1. Floating covers act as an impermeable barrier against evaporation. Many different

materials have been trialed in the past including polyethylene, wax, foam and
polystyrene. Covers are one of the most effective evaporation reduction
techniques (Cooley and Myers1973).
2. Floating objects use the same principle as floating covers, however rather than a
continuous cover multiple individual units are used, often floating freely. This
allows for easier installation and maintenance of the cover but reduces the
evaporation reduction efficiency (Cooley 1970).
3. Shade structures reduce the energy available for evaporation; reduce wind action
over the water surface and trap humid air under the cover, all factors that
contribute to evaporation. These structures are generally suited to smaller water
storages (Alvarez et al. 2006)
4. Chemical covers are based on the use of long chain alcohols to form a thin layer
on the surface of the water to reduce evaporation. These layers are biodegradable
and need to be reapplied every 1 to 4 days. Chemical methods are not as effective
as physical methods (Erick 2007)
5. Design Features: Water storages may be constructed or altered to proportionally
reduce the evaporation rates by using methods such as:
a. Deeper storages with smaller surface areas;
b. Cellular construction which divides large storages into smaller ones to
reduce wind action and allows water depth to be maximized by shifting
water between cells; and
c. Using windbreaks.

Design features are generally easier to build into a new storage, when site selection
can be altered, than retrofitting into an existing storage (Craig and Hancock 2004).
Biological Covers such as lily pads and duckweed, have the potential to reduce the
evaporation from the water surfaces they live on. The evaporation reduction efficiency is
much lowers than other methods available and so these methods have had little emphasis
placed on them (Cooley and Idso1980). There are a number of advantages and
disadvantages associated with each method including:

1. Floating covers are highly effective at evaporation reduction, though they can
have impacts on water quality, severe impacts on aquatic life.

5
International Engineering Convention.
Domascus, Syria and Medinah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, May 11-18, 2009

2. Floating objects are not as effective at evaporation reduction as covers though the
impacts upon the water storage are not as great and they are easier to install and
maintain.
3. Shade structures can have a similar evaporation reduction efficiency to floating
objects and do not have significant water quality impacts though are more
expensive than both covers and floating objects.
4. Chemical evaporation retardants have lower evaporation reduction efficiency than
physical methods but have reduced environmental impacts, health impacts and
with little or no capital expenditure required. The operational costs are greater due
to the chemical costs.
5. Design features have varying evaporation efficiencies and can be combined with
any of the above methods to maximize evaporation control. They are most easily
6. integrated during construction but can be retrofitted into existing storages
Biological covers have low evaporation reduction efficiencies, may cause
environmental impacts and are suitable in only some circumstances.

Conclusions and Recommendations

The important conclusions and recommendations from this paper are:

1. Evaporation control methods for large water bodies primarily consist of physical
and chemical methods.
2. Physical evaporation reduction methods are able to “save” a greater percentage of
water, between 70%-100% and entail a large capital cost and lower operations
and maintenance costs.
3. Chemical evaporation control methods “save” a lower percentage of water,
between 20%-40% and have little capital cost but higher operations and
maintenance costs.
4. All of the potential measures will impact upon the aquatic ecosystems on water
storages to some extent; physical control methods are likely to have a greater
impact than chemical controls.
5. Size of the storage and local conditions may dictate the evaporation control
techniques that are applicable to water storage.
6. Chemical control techniques can be used as required where as physical control
methods are more permanent.
7. If evaporation reduction methods are required in environmentally sensitive areas,
a chemical evaporation retardant be employed.
8. Physical evaporation control methods only are employed in areas with little or no
environmental significance.
9. If high levels of evaporation reduction are required then a physical reduction
method be employed.
10. When designing new water storages that evaporation control techniques such as
deeper storages, cellular construction and windbreaks be included in the design if
feasible

6
International Engineering Convention.
Domascus, Syria and Medinah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, May 11-18, 2009

References

Alvarez, V. M., Baille, A., Molina Martı´nez J.M., and Gonza´ lez-Real, M. M. 2006.
Efficiency of shading materials in reducing evaporation from fee water surfaces.
Agricultural Water Management, 84: 229-239.
Arnell, N.W. 1999. Climate change and global waterresources. Global Environmental
Change, 9: S31-S46.
Arnell, N.W., and Reynardb, N.S. 1996.The effects of climate change due to global
warming on river flows in Great Britain. Journal of Hydrology, 183: 397-424.
Beare, S., and. Heaney A. 2002. Climate change and water resources in the Murray
Darling Basin, Australia; Impacts and Adaptation. ABARE Conference Paper 02.11,
33pp. Available from www.abareconomics.com.
Brown, J.A.H. 1988. The potential for reducing open water evaporation losses: A
review. In: Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium, ANU, Camberra, Australia,
108–115.
Brutsaert, W. 1982. Evaporation into the atmosphere: Theory, History and Applications.,
Reidel, Dordrecht, 299 pp.
Christiansen, C., and Worlton, L. 1998. Reduced set evaporation station. Irrig. J., 48:
12-14
Christiansen, J.E. 1968. Pan evaporation and evapotranspiration from climatic data”, J.
Irrig. Drain. Eng. 94: 243-265.
Condie, S.A., and Webster, I.T.1997. The influence of wind stress, temperature, and
humidity gradients on evaporation from reservoirs. Water Resources Research, 33:
2813-2822.
Cooley, K.R. 1970. Energy relationships in the design of floating covers for evaporation
reduction. Water Resour. Res. 6: 717-727.
Cooley, K.R. 1983. Evaporation reduction: Summary of long term tank studies. J. Irrig.
Drainage Div ASCE, 109: 89-98.
Cooley, K.R., and Idso, S.B. 1980. Effects of lily pads on evaporation. Water Resour.
Res. 16: 605-606.
Cooley, K.R., and Myers, L.E. 1973. Evaporation reduction with reflective covers. J
Irrig. Drainage Div ASCE. 99: 353-363.
Craig, I. and Hancock N. 2004. Methods for assessing dam evaporation – An
Introductory Paper. IAA Conference Adelaide.
Craig, I., Green, A., Scobie, M., and Schmidt, E. 2005. Controlling evaporation loss
from water storages. NCEA Publication No 1000580/1.
Dingman, S.L. 1994. Physical Hydrology. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 646 pp.
Donald, O. R., Thomas C. W., Donald, C. B., and Gene, E. L.2007. Comparison of 15
evaporation methods applied to a Small Mountain Lake in the Northeastern USA.
Journal of Hydrology, 340: 149-166.
Erick, S. 2007. Controlling evaporation losses from large storage dams using chemical
monolayers. Report, Centre for Engineering in Agriculture: University of Southern
Queensland, Australia.
Frenkiel, J. 1965. Evaporation reduction, physical and chemical principles and review of
experiments. UNESCO arid zone Research Series XXVII, UNESCO, 77 pp.

7
International Engineering Convention.
Domascus, Syria and Medinah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, May 11-18, 2009

Hipsey, M.R., and Sivapalan, M. 2003. Parameterizing the effects of a wind shelter on
evaporation from small water bodies. Water Resour. Res. 39(12): 1339,
doi:10.1029/2002WR001784
Igor, A. S. 1999. Trends in water consumption and evaporation. Joint Report,
Hydrological Institute, Petersburg and UNESCO, Paris, France.
Jones, F. E. 1992. Evaporation of water with emphasis on application and measurements.
Lewis Publishers,Inc.
Jozef, S. 2008. New findings about the complementary relationship based evaporation
estimate Mmethod. Journal of Hydrology, 354 (1-4): 171-186.
Larry, D.,. Karen,W., John, B., and Victor, H. B. 2007. Design information for
evaporation ponds in Wyoming. Report No. WWRC-85-21, Wyoming Water Research
Center: University of Wyoming, Colorado, USA.
Montaseri, M., and Adeloye A.J. 2004. A graphical rule for volumetric evaporation loss
correction in reservoir Capacity-Yield-Performance Planning in Urmia region, Iran.
Water Resour. Manage. 18: 55–74.
Özgür, K. 2006. Daily pan evaporation modeling using a Neuro-Fuzzy computing
technique. Journal of Hydrology. 329: 636-646.
Penman, H.L 1948. Natural evaporation from open water, bare and grass. Proc. R Soc.
Lond. Ser. A. 193: 120–145.
Shaw, E. M. 1988. Hydrology in practice. Van Nostrand Reinhold International., London,
United Kingdom.
Shuttleworth, W.J.1993. In: Maidment, D.R. (Ed.), “Evaporation”, McGraw-Hill, New
York, 4.1–4.53 (Chapter 4).
Singh, V. P., and Xu, C. Y. 1997. Evaluation and generalization of 13 mass transfer
equations for determining free water evaporation. Hydrological Processes., 11: 311-
323.
Watts, P. J. 2005. Scoping study - Reduction of evaporation from farm dams. Final report
to the National Program for Sustainable Irrigation.NPSI. Final Report FSA1, 79 pp.
http://www.lwa.gov.au/downloads/publications_pdf/ER050936.pdf
Yun-sheng, Yu., and knapp, H. V. 1985.Weekly, monthly and annual evaporations for
Elk City Lake. Journal of Hydrology, 80: 93-110.